!
!
!
!
!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
! !
Disse a ion Mas e C ossways in Cul u al Na a i es
Pa adoxes o A chi ing Pe o mance:
Tino Sehgal's Cons uc ed Si ua ions and Hans Ul ich
Ob is 's In e iew P ojec
Supe ision:
D . Cláudia Madei a (Uni e sidade No a de Lisboa)
D . Amanda Boe zkes (Uni e si y o Guelph)
S uden : Isabel Rod igues da Cos a
C ossways in Cul u al Na a i es
Da e: 20 June 2016
!
2!
I, Isabel Rod igues da Cos a, he eby ce i y ha his disse a ion,
which is 1977 wo ds in leng h, has been w i en by me, ha i is a eco d o
wo k ca ied ou by me, and ha i has no been submi ed in any p e ious
applica ion o a highe deg ee. All sen ences o passages quo ed in his
disse a ion om o he people's wo k (wi h o wi hou i ial changes) ha e
been placed wi hin quo a ion ma ks, and speci ically acknowledged by
e e ence o au ho , wo k and page. I unde s and ha plagia ism – he
unacknowledged use o such passages – will be conside ed g ounds o
ailu e in his disse a ion and, i se ious, in he deg ee p og amme as a
whole. I also a i m ha , wi h he excep ion o he speci ic
acknowledgemen s, hese answe s a e en i ely my own wo k.
Signa u e o candida e....................
!
3!
Abs ac
This disse a ion conce ns he p oblema ic o p ese ing
pe o mance a . The epheme al na u e o pe o mance challenges he way
in which a wo ks a e p ese ed and a chi ed in he museum con ex .
Besides his on ological ea u e o pe o mance a , a ecen end in
pe o mance a has eme ged which is capable o challenging he adi ional
iew on and p ac ice o he a chi e.
In he cen e o my disse a ion a e wo se ies o wo ks by Tino
Sehgal and Hans Ul ich Ob is whose aes he ic s a egies e eal
undamen ally di e en a i udes owa ds he p ese a ion o pe o mance.
Despi e hei di e ences howe e , hey sha e an in ense p eoccupa ion wi h
ques ions o documen a ion and a chi ing o he a wo k.
I will show how hese wo ks deal wi h he (un)documen a ion o
hei own wo k and, o a ce ain ex en , how hey sel -a chi e hemsel es.
Mo e speci ically, I will show how hey p oduce an objec o pe o mance
a capable o ope a ing wi hin he a chi e and he eby possibly challenging
and ans o ming i . In essence, his disse a ion will add ess he way in
which ecen pe o mance con ibu es o he ( e)de ini ion o he objec o
pe o mance in pa icula and a in gene al and i s possible modes o
exis ence in ime and space beyond he classical unde s andings o bo h a
and i s a e li e.
!
4!
Table o Con en
Chap e One
I In oduc ion……………………………………………………… 5
II Will o A chi e………………………………………………..…. 8
III The Pa adoxes o he P esen ………………………………… 11
!
Chap e Two
I Cons uc ed Si ua ions……………………………………………15
II Expanded Si ua ion……………………………………………....23
III The Body as A chi e……………………………………………32
IV In e iew P ojec ………………………………………………...34
V In ini e Con e sa ions……………………………………………47
VI Looking Fo wa d: The A chi e o he Fu u e…………………..52
Chap e Th ee
I Pe o mance A e li es……………………………………….…..54
II Conclusion……………………………………………………….65
Bibliog aphy ……………………………………………………….69
Online Sou ces………………………………………………….......73
Appendix…………………………………………………………...74
!
5!
Chap e One
I In oduc ion
O e he las hi y yea s pe o mance a has been mo e and mo e
in eg a ed in o a p og ams whe he in museums, galle ies o cul u al
cen e s. Besides al eady exis ing pe o mances being shown, new wo ks o
a we e commissioned o he p og am o exhibi ions o as an indi idual
show in he museum o galle y space. A leas since he la e 1970s,
pe o mance became an essen ial pa o hea e and dance es i als and
wi h he beginning o he 21s cen u y o all kinds o in e disciplina y
es i als ac oss and e en beyond he ield o he a s.
Analysing hese a p og ams and cu a o ial wo ks helps us o
unde s and in which way pe o mance aes he ics has been app oached and
e en ually amed by aes he ic and cul u al ins i u ions. These app oaches
esul ed om expe iencing pe o mance a e en s and w i ing abou he
ma e ial p ese ed in he a e ma h o hese e en s, such as ex s, ape- and
ideo- eco dings, pho og aphs e c. Academic schola ship and he wo k o
a is s and cu a o s who exhibi ed o adap ed hese wo ks in new con ex s
helped u he o shape hese app oaches.
A qui e ecen in e es in pe o mance a as a ield o s udy has
p o oked many schola s o hink abou he p oblem o i s p ese a ion.
Add essing he p oblema ic o he documen a ion o he e en o he
elabo a ion o ma e ial ha comes ou o hese e en s, mos s udies call o
a empo al app oach o pe o mance a . A e he aces le by he
pe o mance capable o ex end i s pe o ma i i y? Is p esen i ica ion he
mos impo an o e en he exclusi e ac o a s ake in he pe o ma i e
e en ? I no , wha could be he ole o pas and u u e in ega ds o he
pe o ma i e momen ? These deba es can be loca ed ei he in museological

!
6!
and academic con ex s o in a is ic p ac ice as such. This disse a ion will
conside ecen pe o mance p ac ice in ega ds o his p oblema ic.
I will analyze wo se ies o wo ks ha challenge he way in which
he his o y o pe o mance has been w i en. The i s se ies is called
Cons uc ed Si ua ions, he ensemble o he wo k o pe o mance a is
Tino Sehgal. The second is en i led In e iew P ojec which is a
monumen al p ojec o in e iews wi h all kinds o cul u al wo ke s ealized
by he cu a o Hans-Ul ich Ob is . Bo h p ojec s ha e been unning o a
long pe iod o ime; Cons uc ed Si ua ions since 1999 and In e iew
P ojec since he beginning o he 1990. Al hough bo h a is s don’ claim
hei wo k o be amed wi hin he scope o pe o mance a , bo h wo ks
will be conside ed he e as pe o mances. Wha hese p ojec s ha e in
common is a e y in ense p eoccupa ion wi h hei documen a ion and
p ese a ion. Howe e , he wo ks ake on adical di e en ways o
documen hei wo k; while Tino Sehgal p ohibi s all kind o
documen a ion o his pe o mances, Hans-Ul ich Ob is documen s his own
e en s while he is pe o ming, ans o ming his documen a ion in o new
objec s ha become pa o his wo k.
In my analysis, I will look a he way in which bo h wo ks challenge
he a chi e, a guing ha mo e han jus pa icipa ing in he p ocess o
a chi ing, bo h wo ks aes he ics' ake as an in eg al pa o hei wo k a
p oposal o a new way o a chi ing. I will y o p oo ha bo h wo ks may
con ibu e o a new de ini ion o he on ology o pe o mance, which
includes a b oade de ini ion o i s cen al objec ( he ac ual pe o mance as
e en ) – an objec ha can exis and ope a e wi hin he a chi e.
Assuming hese possibili ies is o posi ion my a gumen agains
wha has been a gued o be he only on ological u h o pe o mance a –
ha i exis s me ely in he p esen momen and ha i s epheme al ma e ial
esul s om no hing else bu he ‘encoun e ’ be ween human bodies.
!
7!
Using he c i ical con ibu ions by Paul Auslande , Amelia Jones
and Rebecca Schneide , I will a gue ha pe o mance a emains in i s
aces. To ci cums an ia e his poin u he I will d aw om he ecen
p oposi ion o And é Lepecki and Ad ian Hea h ield ha he objec o
pe o mance a doesn’ become dea h a e i s ac -ness.
The disse a ion is di ided in h ee chap e s. Chap e one deploys in
a b oade pe spec i e he cha ac e is ics o he ecen mo e o pe o mance
a owa ds he a chi e. I also in oduces c ucial no ions o pe o mance
heo y ha will be used in his disse a ion as well as e e ences o he
au ho s and concep s ha will be used. Chap e wo ocuses on he analysis
o he se ies o a wo ks by Sehgal and Ob is . The analysis o hese wo ks
is in i sel di ided in o h ee pa s. The i s pa unde akes a hick
desc ip ion o he wo ks in ela ion o he opic o pe o mance
p ese a ion. The second is an in es iga ion o hei speci ic aes he ic
s a egies. My aim he e will be o show how he e hical implica ions on he
documen a ion o hei wo k con ibu e o he discussion on p ese ing and
collec ing pe o mance a . The hi d is a p o isional conclusion on he new
ways o a chi ing bo h p ojec s p opose.
In he las chap e , I will compa e how bo h wo ks ex end
hemsel es in o hei a e li es. I will p opose ha bo h wo ks p ojec he
a e li es o hei objec in o he a chi e as a way o challenging he
ins i u ional bounda ies ha in ol e selec ion, o ganiza ion, a chi ing and,
ul ima ely, he making o pe o mance his o y.
In essence, wha will be p oposed in his disse a ion is a e alua ion
o he “objec o pe o mance a ” by unde s anding he way in which his
objec , in hese wo se ies o wo ks, is capable o con ibu e ac i ely o he
making o i s own his o y.
!
8!
II The Will o A chi e 1
F om he mani old examples, I will only men ion wo o a gue o
he ele ance o he high con empo a y in e es in p ese ing pe o mance.
Since 2008, he Ame ican cho eog aphe Julie Tolen ino has been
pe o ming he ongoing p ojec “The Sky Remains he Same,” a
pe o mance ha consis s o e-enac men s o pas pe o mances. Tolen ino
in i es he au ho s o he wo ks she wan s o ep oduce and asks hem o
each he how o pe o m hem, in o de o “a chi e” hei wo ks in he own
body. She has been ep oducing wo ks o he a is s Ron A hey, F anco B,
Da id Rousse e and Da id Do man. In 2011, Sa a Wookey ounded
“ eDance”, a pla o m ha unc ions as an a chi e o e-enac ed wo ks o
enowned cho eog aphe s o he Judson Dance Thea e e a, pe o med by
ano he gene a ion o dance a is s. This pla o m ha bo s li e
pe o mances, wo kshops and discussions wi h he aim o keeping some
so o a chi al p ac ice ‘ali e’. Tackling he ques ion o p ese ing
pe o mance in di e en ways, hese examples e eal wha And é Lepecki
cha ac e izes o be he “will o a chi e”.
In he las wen y yea s, he wish o p ese e “li e a ” has become
mo e explici among pe o mance a is s. Also, mo e ecen ly, an inc easing
numbe o es i als and con e ences ha e been dedica ed o he p ac ice o
e-enac men s and pe o mances add essing he a chi e. Some examples a e
he ongoing esea ch p ojec in Ta e Mode n en i led “Pe o mance a Ta e,
Collec ing, A chi ing and Sha ing Pe o mance and he Pe o ma i e“ as
well as New Museum's cycle o con e ences and p esen a ions in 2012
called “Pe o mance A chi ing Pe o mance” and e en he Kaai Thea e
Fes i al in B ussels which ypically assembles he in e na ional a an -ga de
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
1 No ion p oposed by And é Lepecki in he essay “Body as A chi e: Will o e-enac and
A e li es o Dances”, Dance Resea ch Jou nal, Vol. 42, 2010
!
9!
in pe o ma i e a s, dedica ed in 2010 a whole issue o he es i al, en i led
“Re:Mo e”, o e-enac men s o dance and pe o mance.
This u n owa ds he a chi e in pe o mance a has igge ed a sel -
a chi ing end, which o e he las yea s has become mo e and mo e
ecognized as an a p ac ice in i sel . This kind o p ac ice, as can be seen
in he wo examples gi en abo e, explo es new ways o unde s anding he
a chi e and, mo e impo an ly, ask he ques ions o how and why
pe o mance should be echnologically documen ed, c i ically desc ibed
and physically s o ed as an a chi al ma e ial.
Maybe mo e han o he a o ms, pe o mance a has he abili y o
complica e he w i ing o a his o y due o i s s ong dependence on
physical and men al emnan s such as documen a ion, a chi es and
memo ies. F equen ly, he agili y and epheme ali y o hese emnan s call
in o ques ion he possibili y o a chi ing he wo k. As Amelia Jones a gues
in ‘Unp edic able Tempo ali ies: Body and Pe o mance in A His o y’,
pe o mance has he po en ial o “pu p essu e on how we w i e his o y,
which has con en ionally depended on he p edic abili y o s a ic objec s
ha a e nea ly a chi ed, on display, in o de o be iewed and e alua ed.”2
In opposi ion o o he a o ms ha p oduce ‘g aspable’ a objec s ha can
be easily selec ed and a anged in an a chi e, pe o mance a p oduces an
epheme al, slippe y objec , which makes i s classi ica ion and he e o e i s
a chi ing di icul and o en a i s sigh impossible.
O en seen as a eposi o y o memo ies and, in he con ex o a , as
a eposi o y o bodies o wo k, he a chi e, has been mo e b oadly seen as a
memo ial o ou cul u e. As De ida p oposes in his amous essay “A chi e
Fe e ” (1994), he wo d a chi e, in i s o igin, co esponds o he G eek
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
2 Amelia Jones, “Unp edic able Tempo ali ies, The Body and Pe o mance in A His o y”
in Pe o ming A chi es/A chi es o Pe o mance, Uni e si y o Copenhagen: Museum o
Tusculanum, 2013, 53
!
16!
he ans o ma ion o e e yday li e. They we e con inced ha a should
only exis o he pu pose o social and poli ical change. “The e is no
Si ua ionis a , bu he e is Si ua ionis use o a .”12
Despi e his con o e sial ela ionship o a , Si ua ionis
p ac ices we e de eloped ou o Dada and Su ealis expe imen s.13 I is
commonly ag eed ha he SI con inued he a an -ga de explo a ions and
hei a is ic me hods, wi h echniques such as dé i e and dé ou nemen .
The i s , dé i e, (Fig. 1) o d i ing, consis s in andom walks a ound ci ies
in which each pe o me sea ches o alea o y s imuli a ec ing hei
i ine a y. The second, dé ou nemen , (Fig. 2) consis s in he e usal o
o iginal c ea ions and in he belie ha e e y hing ha can be done and said
has o be ein en ion o ein e p e a ion. These p ac ices we e undamen al
o he o eg ounding o aes he ic possibili ies in pe o mance a in he
1960s, he 1970s and la e .
In Sehgal’s wo k, we can obse e he di ec in luence o hese
wo p ac ices. Dé i e can be ound in he aining o his in e p e e s ha a e
asked o cons an ly e-map he pe o ma i e e en as i un olds. The s imuli
gi en by he audience and he a mosphe e o he space guide hei ac ions.
Dé ou nemen is ela ed o Sehgal’s quo idian aes he ics and his emphasis
on e e yday ges u es, clo hes and mo emen s as he basis o his
cho eog aphic c ea ion. His o ically, his can be ela ed o se e al g oups
such as Judson Dance and S e e Pax on, and also Allan Kap ow e en s, he
so-called ‘Happenings’.14
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
12 Guy Debo d, “Repo on he Cons uc ion o Si ua ions”, in Si ua ion, Whi echapel
Galle y, London, 2005, 112
13 As Clai e Bishop makes clea in A i icial Hells: Pa icipa o y A and he Poli ics o
Spec a o ship, in eali y, he ela ionship o SI o a was no always clea . The i s phase
om 1957-62 is commonly ag eed o be he pe iod when he g oup was mos sympa he ic
o a . Bu a e 1962 un il he end o he g oup in 1972, he g oup became inc easingly
opposed o a .
14 Clai e Bishop, A i icial Hells: Pa icipa o y A and he Poli ics o Spec a o ship,
Ve so, London, 2012, 175.

!
17!
I we look a he beginning o Guy Debo d’s ex Repo on he
Cons uc ion o Si ua ions, we can unde s and he simila i ies be ween he
Si ua ionis s' and Sehgal’s si ua ions:
“The cons uc ion o si ua ions begins beyond he uins o
he mode n spec acle. I is easy o see how much he e y p inciple
o he spec acle – non-in e en ion – is linked o he aliena ion o he
old wo ld. […] The si ua ion is hus designed o be li ed by i s
cons uc o s. The ole played by a passi e o me ely bi -pa ‘public’
mus cons an ly diminish, while ha played by hose canno be
called ac o s, bu a he , in a new sense o he e m ‘li e s’, mus
s eadily inc ease."15
I we subs i u e mode n spec acle o museum a he beginning o
he quo e, we migh unco e he unc ion o Sehgal’s app op ia ion o
Si ua ionis si ua ions. Bo h aim owa ds s eadily inc easing he
pa icipa ion o he audience. Bo h claim ha a si ua ion should be played
by i s own cons uc o s, he eby a oiding he sepa a ion be ween
pe o me s and audience. In Cons uc ed Si ua ions, he ba ie be ween
in e p e e s and audience is almos impe cep ible. This sepa a ion is ins ead
be ween he ones amilia wi h he si ua ion and he ones who a e dealing
wi h he si ua ion o he i s ime. Such is he case o These Associa ions
(Fig. 3) pe o med o he i s ime a Ta e Mode n, London, in 2012. This
piece consis s o mo e han i y in e p e e s o di e en ages a anged in
he space, ac ing as i hey we e isi o s. In an in iguing way, hey a e all
cho eog aphed. Only a e some ime, we unde s and ha he e is a pa e n
in he way hey mo e h ough he space. This pa e n is no ixed in
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
15 Debo d, Cons uc ed Si ua ions, 110.
!
18!
ad ance, bu wo ks as a game wi h ce ain ules he in e p e e s ha e o
ollow. These ules wo k as a se o ins uc ions:
“I se up hese i ual games wi h ela i ely simple ules in
which a g oup o indi iduals ha e o wo k oge he . I is no like
hey a e all ma ching in one di ec ion. I is mo e like oo ball.” 16
These ins uc ions play ou on a la ge scale in he space o he
museum. This in e es o games can also be ound in wha Debo d calls
play ulness. Jus i ying his way o cons uc ing si ua ions, he c i icizes
indus ial design's p e e ence o unc ionalis p oduc s and o wa ds he
dis up i e quali y o play ulness:
“In ou ime, unc ionalism (an ine i able exp ession o
echnological ad ance) is a emp ing en i ely o elimina e play. The
pa isans o indus ial design complain ha hei objec s a e spoiled
by people’s play ul endencies. (…) The only p og essi e way ou is
o libe a e he endency owa d play elsewhe e, and on a la ge
scale.” 17
Debo d a gues ha he only way o igh agains he
commodi ica ion o goods is o c ea e si ua ions ha could “p omo e
expe imen al o ms o a game o e olu ion”. 18 Fo he SI, he wo k on
si ua ions was p ima ily concei ed o ind new ypes o play ulness and
in e ac ion in o de o diminish he powe o he en e ainmen o isual
images ha , acco ding o hem, was causing aliena ion in mass cul u e.
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
16 Tino Sehgal. In e iew wi h S.T. The Economis , July, 2012.
17 Debo d, Cons uc ed Si ua ions, 111, 112
18 Debo d, Cons uc ed Si ua ions,112.
!
19!
Sehgal’s wo k exposes a simila abili y o p oduce and dep oduce i sel .
Dep oduc ion is no jus an ex e nal ac o , bu an essen ial elemen o he
a wo k.
When asked abou he ela ion o his wo k o dep oduc ion, Sehgal
said in an in e iew wi h Tim G i in o A o um:
“The eason I am in e es ed in he ans o ma ion o ac ions
and he simul anei y o p oduc ion and dep oduc ion is because I
hink ha he appea ance in Wes e n socie ies in he wen ie h
cen u y o bo h an excess supply o he goods ha ul ill he basic
human needs and mankind’s endange ing o he speci ic disposi ion
o “na u e” in which human li e seem possible ende s he
hegemony o he dominan mode o p oduc ion ques ionable (…)
How could we p oduce hings ha , on he one hand, a en’
p oblema ic and, on he o he , a e mo e in e es ing o complex, o
less s a ic.” 19
By ejec ing he e m pe o mance o desc ibe his wo k, Sehgal sees
his wo k a he as isual a , since i is p esen ed in galle ies and museums
and accessible a he same opening imes as o he isual a exhibi ions. His
insis ence on c ea ing an epheme al objec ha is concei ed and p esen ed
as a isual a wo k is in i sel a ges u e o econ igu a ion o he ame o
he museum. Bu Sehgal’s ges u e goes beyond ques ioning he aes he ic
ame o he museum. In his wo wo ks This is Good (2001) and This is
Righ , (2003) Sehgal ques ions he ole o he museum and i s ela ionship
wi h he a ma ke . In he i s pe o mance, he i le, i onically, ocuses
a en ion on he end o pe o ma i e e en s in museums. The audience is
aken by su p ise in he exhibi ion space when he museum gua ds s a o
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
19 Tino Sehgal. In e iew wi h Tim G i in, A o um, 2012
!
20!
pe o m a i id, synch onized dance. The second one, pe o med a F ieze
A ai London, consis s o wo child en p esen ing Tino Sehgal's wo ks
a ailable o pu chase. They show he pieces and deli e some in o ma ion
abou hem, such as da e, edi ion numbe , p ice and also “e e y now and
hen hey lashed wi h a bi o a -c i ical e minology.”20 Focusing on he
ela ionship be ween museum and a ma ke in he piece This is Exchange
(2003), p esen ed a he Venice Biennale 2005, Sehgal and his in e p e e s
con on ed he isi o s wi h he o e o be asked se e al ques ions abou he
a ma ke and o ge paid o hei answe s. The isi o s could hen choose
o answe o no , bu no hing beyond he con e sa ion be ween in e p e e s
and isi o s is shown. In ha way, he expec ed oles a e in e ed and he
isi o s ake on he oles o consul an s. As Sehgal no es, he audience is
“paid a ce ain amoun i hey deli e a p oduc . The p oduc is ha hey
ell hei opinion on ma ke economy. They a e no opposi e o an objec
which hey can hen in e p e o be subjec owa ds.”21
Sehgal’s esis ance o he p oduc ion o objec s is no necessa ily
ela ed o a esis ance o he commodi ica ion o goods, al hough i may
appea his way in a i s eading o his wo k. Sehgal's wo k is
undocumen ed and i s lack o documen a ion is pa o he wo k i sel . His
e usal o pic u es, ilm and cu a o ial ex s o any o he kind o
ep oduc ion is an in eg al pa o he aes he ic ea u es o his wo k. He
claims o ha e he memo y o his wo k ‘ma ked’ in he pa icipan s’ bodies
and memo ies.
In Unma ked: The Poli ics o Pe o mance (1993), Peggy
Phelan a gues ha pe o mance in i s s ic on ological sense is non-
ep oduc i e.
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
20 Clai e Bishop, “No Pic u e Please: The A o Tino Sehgal”, A o um, May 2005
21 Tino Sehgal, In e iew wi h Hans-Ul ich Ob is , In e iew P ojec , Volume II, 838.
!
21!
"Pe o mance’s only li e is in he p esen . Pe o mance
canno be sa ed, eco ded, documen ed, o o he wise pa icipa e in
he ci cula ion o ep esen a ions o ep esen a ion: once i does so,
i becomes some hing o he han pe o mance." 22
Peggy Phelan’s con ibu ion o he esea ch on he p ese a ion o
pe o mance a is conce ned wi h he e hical implica ions o w i ing abou
epheme al e en s. Phelan sugges s ha he pe o ma i e e en only exis s
whils i is happening. Acco ding o Phelan, he challenge o he a
his o ian when w i ing on pe o mance a is o y o e-ma k he e en in
he w i ing i sel . In his way, he ac o w i ing is cohe en wi h he
disappea ance o he objec , ins ead o simula ing i s p ese a ion. She
unde lines ha we mus emembe ha he ‘a e -e ec o disappea ance is
he expe ience o subjec i i y i sel .’ The disappea ance is accoun ed o as
a pa o he pe o ma i e e en and he ehicle ha ansla es i s absence
in o subjec i i y.
Tino Sehgal’s wo k has as i s undamen al elemen a magne ic
ela ion be ween he p esen and he u u e. The disappea ance o he
a wo k is bound up wi h i s pe o ma i e momen . As Sehgal a gues in an
in e iew, his wo k p oduces and dep oduces i sel . The isibili y ha
Sehgal gi es o i s disappea ance is e ealed h ough he discon inui y o
he objec in i s ep oduc ion. In his way, he is like he a his o ian.
Howe e , in a comple ely di e en way, Sehgal builds an a chi e o his
wo k by encou aging he audience o con inue he pe o mance in hei
memo ies o he e en .
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
22 Phelan, Unma ked: he Poli ics o Pe o mance, 148.

!
22!
The impulse owa ds he in eg a ion o hese ea u es and
expe iences in o a wo k is al eady e iden in he ea lies wo ks o Sehgal.
One o his ea lies pe o mances is Twen y Minu es o he Twen y Cen u y
(1999) whe e he pe o med naked and in ch onological succession he bi h
and his o y o mode n dance by e-enac ing signa u e mo emen s o wen y
impo an cho eog aphe s. This dimension o Sehgal’s a is ic con ibu ion
can also be seen in he wo ks Ins ead o allowing some hing o ise up o
you ace dancing B uce and Dan and o he hings (2000) and Kiss (2002).
In Ins ead o allowing, one dance epea edly execu es he same mo emen s
inco po a ing he mo emen om Dan G aham’s dual-sc een Supe -8
p ojec ion Roll, 1970, and B uce Nauman’s ideos Tony Sinking in o he
Floo , Face up and Face Down and Elke Allowing he Floo o Rise Up
o e He , Face Up, bo h om 1973. Kiss (Fig. 4) is a sculp u al wo k o
wo in e p e e s ha a e e-enac ing he momen be o e and a e a kiss,
e en ually esembling emb acing couples om his o ical wo ks o a such
as Augus e Rodin’s, The Kiss (1889), Cons an in B âncusi’s The Kiss
(1908), Gu s a Klim ’s (1907-8) and a ious Gus a e Coube pain ings
om he 1860s.
Sehgal does he opposi e o wha Peggy Phelan sugges s. In hese
wo wo ks, he uses non-pe o ma i e a such as pain ing and ilm in o de
o es age hei inhe en pe o ma i e possibili ies. By sub e ing he
ma e ial possibili ies o hese wo ks, he exposes wha hey canno o e : he
pe o ma i e quali y o he si ua ion hey sugges .
Analysing he wo k o Sehgal, we a e emp ed o ead i only
om he pe spec i e o a desi e o a egime o o al imma e iali y. Bu
con a y o he poli ics o dema e ializa ion o he la e 1960s, whe e he
p oduc ion o imma e ial a wo ks was conside ed an escape om a ’s
!
23!
ela ionship o he ma ke and he museum, Sehgal does no a emp o
p o ec his wo k om being sold o shown in spaces o he han museums o
galle ies. His ela ionship wi h aes he ic ins i u ions is one o ex eme
p oximi y. His ul ima e aim is o wo k wi h exis ing condi ions and
con en ions and challenge hem om he inside.
II Expanded Si ua ion
In o de o unde s and his dimension o Sehgal’s wo k, we ha e o
look mo e closely a his aes he ic s a egy. As I ha e said, Sehgal adop s
and a icula es he SI echniques by in eg a ing hem in he space o he
museum. As Jessica Mo gan, he cu a o o The Dakaslopous Collec ion in
Ta e Mode n said in he con ex o he opening o his exhibi ion in 2012:
“People will be doing hings wi h hei body, in pa allel wi h wha is going
on in he ci y.”23
Jus like he SI p oposed o do in hei p ac ice o dé i e, Sehgal
ies o g asp he en i onmen o he exhibi ion space and use wha happens
spon aneously inside ha space as ma e ial ha cons i u es his si ua ions.
Jus like he p ac i ione s o he dé i e, his in e p e e s a e old o be
ex emely a en i e o he s imulus gi en by e e y hing ha is implica ed in
he si ua ion, such as he pa icula space, he p esence and beha iou o he
iewe s and he gene al en i onmen and a mosphe e gene a ed by hei
mo emen . Thus, hei ask is o in eg a e and po en ia e ha s imulus by
le ing i ans o m and e en ually conduc he si ua ion. These Associa ions
is a good example o he en i onmen es ablished in he museum wo ks as a
‘nou ishing s uc u e’ o he si ua ion and, he e o e, o he e en . The piece
was pe o med in he Tu bine Hall o Ta e Mode n in London, whe e a
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
23 Ta e Mode n. “Unile e Se ies Tino Sehgal“ h p://www. a e.o g.uk/wha s-on/ a e-
mode n/exhibi ion/unile e -se ies- ino-sehgal-2012, Las Access 16 June, 2016.
!
24!
a ie y o hese s imuli we e cons an ly being in eg a ed in he on-going
pe o mance. The in eg a ion o hese s imuli occu s wi h he simple
ges u e o he in e p e e s cap u ing he in o ma ion o he ambience in he
hall. Acco ding o he space, i s a chi ec u e and i s unc ionali y as a ansi
space, many o hese ‘s imuli’ came om he c owds queuing o en e he
museum, he ga he ings o s uden s and ou is s ha spen hei ime a he
en ance o he museum and he isi o s ha came o see he piece.
Toge he , hese g oups o m an unexpec ed lux o people. The dynamics
c ea ed by ha lux ( eloci y, quali y o mo emen e c.) o he bodies and
objec s ha make up his si ua ion (which has been es ablished in he
o e on o he pe o mance) a e wha cons i u e he ma e iali y and e en
he objec hood o he wo k. I is impo an o no e ha human bodies (and
wha hey do) a e wha Sehgal conside s he ma e ial o his wo k, so his
lux o people ha is cons an ly mo ing in and ou o he galle y o he
museum is maybe he cen al elemen o his pe o mance.
“As my wo k e ol es, i is much mo e abou c ea ing a
common si ua ion be ween he isi o o he iewe . O cou se he
si ua ion is ini ia ed by people doing hings. The on ological s a us
o going o say he same…bu i ’s oscilla ing be ween almos being
he same and being di e en . The mo e my wo k e ol es, maybe he
isi o e en knows mo e abou i , has mo e powe o e how he
piece will de elop hen e en he in e p e e s” Tino Sehgal 24
A a i s glance, Sehgal’s wo k migh seem o subsc ibe o he
p emises o ela ional aes he ics, since his i s conce n is he ela ionship
es ablished be ween in e p e e s and audience. Bu , con a y o wha
Nicolas Bou iaud a gues in Rela ional Aes he ics, whe e he p oposes a
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
24 Tino Sehgal, In e iew wi h Hans-Ul ich Ob is , In e iew P ojec , Volume II, 839
!
25!
new idea o o m ha is c ea ed in he dimension o in e -pe sonal
ela ionships,25 Sehgal is sea ching o a o m ha eme ges om wi hin a
si ua ion. The eby, ins ead o p oducing an ‘encoun e ’, a e m o en used in
hea e and pe o mance heo y, e e ing p ima ily o he encoun e
be ween human beings, Sehgal designs a ‘si ua ion’ in which se e al
ela ional sphe es can be included. Thus, ins ead o me ely using he (in e -
human) encoun e as an aes he ic possibili y, Sehgal explo es he aes he ics
o he (mo e- han-human) si ua ion. Al hough Sehgal’s si ua ions ake place
inside he museum, hey open hemsel es up o a ious o he sphe es
including he gene al space and en i onmen , he s able and ansi o y
objec s su ounding he in e p e e s and e en he mos ly hidden
in as uc u e o he museum. In o he wo ds, Sehgal’s piece eaches ou o
ha which condi ions and a ec s he piece om ou side: he space and
en i onmen whe e i is p esen ed, he in e ac ion o human bodies and
objec s and ul ima ely he s uc u e o he ins i u ion, i s ins i u ional se ing
and i s o ganiza ional sys em.
Wha seems o be a ameless s a egy a i s , glance, is a conscious
cons uc ion o an a i icial ame, a cons uc ed si ua ion, ha challenges
he ins u i ional ame. He e a pa allel could be made o he wo k o E ing
Go man, F ame Analysis: An Essay on he O ganiza ion o Expe ience, in
which he c ea es a model o obse e he accep ed social en i ies, such as he
ela ions be ween indi iduals and o al ins i u ions. Fo Go man, ames
a e he p incipals o o ganiza ion go e ning e en s. Sehgal’s si ua ions
show a g ea simila i y wi h Go man's ames. On he one hand, hey
ques ion he na u e o ela ionships be ween indi iduals and ins i u ions, on
he o he hand, hey p ees ablish s able ules ha go e n he way in which
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
25 As Bou iaud a gues, i is an a o m “which akes being oge he as a cen al heme,
he “encoun e “ be ween beholde and pic u e, and he collec i e elabo a ion o meaning.”
Rela ional Aes he ics, P esses du Réel, 2002, 15
!
32!
p oduce an objec ha would esis he a ma ke by “s opping o exis ”
a e i s p oduc ion, Sehgal’s con ibu ion o he a museum deba es o he
wen y- i s cen u y goes beyond c i ical ges u e, and ins ead leans owa ds
inding al e na i es.
Sehgal's aes he ic si ua ion wo ks owa ds modi ying he a ec i e,
pe cep ual and concep ual possibili ies o he a chi e. His pe o mances
o eg ound and gene a e social ela ions ha c ea e he a chi e o his pieces
and a e able o syn hesize a piece o his o y sha ed by he pa icipan s. They
encou age deeply a ec i e expe iences ha some o he pa icipan s
conside can lead o pe sonal and ins i u ional ans o ma ion. By aking
pa in he a ma ke , Sehgal can s a egically change i om wi hin by
p oposing an aes he ics ha o ces a change in he p ocedu es ollowed o
exhibi , p ese e and acqui e he wo k.
III Body as A chi e
The space Sehgal opens up and closes in his si ua ional-based
pe o mance is ha which only emains in i s absence. As i has been
a gued, in pe o mance heo y, pe o mance canno eside in i s ma e ial
aces so he e o e i disappea s. Bu Sehgal complica es he issue o
emains as ma e ial because his aces a e all imb ica ed in he li e body.
Sehgal sees he human body as pa o he ma e ial o which a si ua ion is
made up. Assuming a complex se ing in which he bodies o bo h he
in e p e e s and he iewe a e seen as ma e ial, his si ua ions in ol e wha
su ounds he body’s encoun e by ac i ely in eg a ing i in he cons uc ion
o he piece. Wha is being p oposed he e is ha in he se ies Cons uc ed
Si ua ions, he body is explo ed om a ma e ialis ic pe spec i e in which
‘wha he body does’ is an in eg al pa o he piece, jus like any o he
ma e ial. In answe o he c i icism o his wo k in which he was c i icized
o e ishizing he body, Sehgal said: “you can’ e ishize he human body,

!
33!
since e ishize means o anima e some hing, and you can’ anima e
some hing which is al eady anima ed”.34 In his answe , Sehgal plays wi h a
logical con adic ion; he human body is anima ed pe se. Sehgal uses i s
po en iali y as ma e ial. In his wo k, he human body is ei he an epheme al
objec in he momen o p oduc ion o he wo k and igh a e , in he
momen o i s dep oduc ion, he body is a li ing es imony o he
expe ience. This way, he ac ha he wo k is dep oduced does no make i
s op exis ing; ins ead, because he e is no documen a ion, i is sa ed in he
memo y o he bodies and ca ied ou in he memo y o he pa icipan s.
“Somehow i exis s in my mind, in my body and he bodies
o he people who know how o do i , and i also exis s in hei
memo ies and o hose o he people who saw i .”35
Tino Sehgal’s p ac ice challenges he desi e o pe o mance o
p ese e i sel . Besides he isible si ua ion, he encoun e o he bodies,
Sehgal p oduces he dep oduc ion o his si ua ion. This dep oduc ion is
achie ed by he in en ional undocumen a ion o he e en . A he same
ime, he undocumen ed si ua ion does no s op o be he wo k. In his way,
he wo ks owa ds disappea ance, as Peggy Phelan sugges s, bu wi hou
in e e ing o p edic ing he momen in which he objec will inally be
comple ely o go en. Since Cons uc ed Si ua ions is pe pe ua ed in
isi o s’, pa icipan s’, in e p e e s’ and museum s a ’s memo y, i s objec
disappea s when hei collec i e memo y s ops exis ing. The objec is
he e o e ans o med in o, pe pe ua ed in and ca ied ou in he
pa icipan s’ memo ies and desc ip ions o he e en .
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
34 See F ieze A Talk websi e: h p:// ieze ounda ion.o g/ alks/de ail/ ino-sehgal-in-
con e sa ion-wi h-joe g-heise /.
35 Tino Sehgal, In e iew wi h Hans-Ul ich Ob is , In e iew P ojec , Volume II, 828
!
34!
IV In e iew P ojec
As al eady men ioned in he in oduc ion, he wo se ies o wo ks
analysed in his disse a ion en e ain adically opposed ela ionships wi h
he a chi e. While Tino Sehgal e uses any kind o documen a ion o his
wo k as a way o a oiding he p oduc ion o isual ma e ial ela ed o his
p ac ice, Hans-Ul ich Ob is exhaus i ely documen s his in e iew
pe o mances in o de o sa e he emains o wha has been said and o
p oduce all kinds o new objec s on he basis o his ma e ial. Sehgal's
p ojec is clea ly commi ed o wha he calls he dep oduc ion o
pe o mance, whe eas Ob is makes a case o he in ensi ied
documen a ion as pe o mance.
The Swiss-bo n a cu a o s a ed he In e iew P ojec (Fig. 6)
almos hi y yea s ago. His i s in e iews eme ged ou o equen s udio
isi s o he a is s wi h whom he had s a ed o wo k. Ha ing obse ed a
lack o his o ical ac s ega ding he p oduc ion o a p ocesses o e he
20 h cen u y, Ob is decided o in e iew aged p ac i ione s (a is s,
cu a o s, scien is s, a chi ec s, designe s e c.) om he beginning o he
cen u y. This on-going p ojec was called he Cen ena y P ojec and had as
i s goal o in e iew he las gene a ion o c ea i e p ac i ione s ha ac ed in
he second hal o he 20 h cen u y.
Today, In e iew P ojec is an ex ensi e a chi e o mo e han
2,000 hou s o eco ded in e iews wi h a is s, bu also p ac i ione s om
o he a eas such as w i e s, scien is s, enginee s, a chi ec s, ilmmake s,
philosophe s and cu a o s. I has become an in e disciplina y a chi e ha
exis s physically on a ious suppo s such as ideo, ex and ape eco ds.
In e iew P ojec has been seen as a cu a o ial p ac ice in which he
p ac ice o he in e iew has been explo ed as a medium o a
!
35!
con e sa ional-based pe o mance. O e he las hi y yea s, his p ac ice o
in e iewing s a ed o be in ensi ied and o ien ed in di e en ways,
b anching i sel in o di e en ields o he han a s and c ea ing cycles o
in e es . No icing a gap be ween he cu a o ial discussions o he 1990s and
he his o y o cu a o ial p ac ices be o e ha , Ob is s a ed o in e iew
a ious p ac i ione s o he 1960s o dig up he his o y o cu a ing om he
1960s o he p esen day. He in e iewed he p o agonis s o he mos
signi ican cu a o ial wo ks o he 1960s such as Ha ald Szeeman, Anne
d'Ha noncou , We ne Ho man and Lucy Lippa d.
“The idea o hese in e iews was o s a a his o y o
impo an cu a o ial posi ions in he 1960s (…) These pe sons
(ac i e p ac i ione s) a e amilia wi h he his o y o wha came
be o e hem. I mean Szeeman is comple ely amilia wi h Ha y
G a Kessle , and Willem S andbe g is comple ely amilia wi h
Alexande Do ne . Li le by li le, h ough in e iewing he
p o agonis s o he 1960s, I go mo e insigh in he his o ical
ac s.”36
His in e es , mo e han econs i u ing hese cu a o ial e en s, was o
map he de elopmen o he cu a o ial ield by unde s anding he way in
which exhibi ion models we e c ea ed. Since cu a ing is qui e a young ield,
he wo k o Hans-Ul ich Ob is has been an eno mous con ibu ion o
knowledge abou he p ac ice and abou i s his o ical e olu ion. As an
example o his p ac ice, in his in e iew wi h he Swiss cu a o Ha ald
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
36 Hans Ul ich Ob is , In e iew wi h Ga in Wade, E e y hing You Wan ed o Know Abou
Cu a ing Bu you We e A aid o Ask, S e nbe g P ess, New Yo k, 2011, 140
!
36!
Szeeman37 in 1996, Ob is ocused he in e iew owa ds he cu a o ial
s a egy explo ed in he exhibi ion “Happenings and Fluxus”. This
exhibi ion, commissioned by Hans Sohm and Ha ald Szeemann, and ha
ook place a he Kölnische Kuns e ein in Cologne in 1970, ma ked he
ue beginning o he p ac ice o cu a ing epheme al wo ks. The exhibi ion
p o ided a map o he a is ic p ac ices o Fluxus in Eu ope in 1960 and he
dialogue o hose a is s wi h e en s in he US a decade ea lie .
“HUO: Le 's alk abou you 1970 exhibi ion "Happening and
Fluxus" in Cologne. In his exhibi , ime was mo e impo an han
space. How did you decide on his app oach?
HS: (…) When I was asked by Cologne's cul u al minis e o do a
show, I hough , his is he place o e ace he his o y o Happenings
and Fluxus. Wuppe al, whe e Nam Jun Paik, Beuys, and Wol
Vos ell had s aged e en s, was nea by. So was Wiesbaden, whe e
Geo ge Maciunas o ganized ea ly Fluxus conce s, and in Cologne
i sel Heine F ied ich p omo ed La Mon e Young. I chose a h ee-
pa s uc u e. Pa one was a wall o documen s ha I pu oge he
wi h Hans Sohm, who had passiona ely collec ed he in i a ions,
lye s, and o he p in ed ma e ials ha ela ed o all he happenings
and e en s in ecen a his o y. This wall o documen s di ided he
space o Cologne's Kuns e ein in wo. On each side, he e we e
smalle spaces whe e a is s could p esen hei own wo k - his was
he second pa o he show (…) A hi d pa consis ed o
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
37 Ha ald Szeeman (1933-2005) is seen as one o he mos in luen ial p ac i ione s in
cu a o ial p ac ice, his wo k as been seen as a c ucial con ibu ion o he de elopmen o
cu a ing as an a o m.
!
37!
pe o mances by Vos ell, Robe Wa s, Dick Higgings, as well as
Kap ow’s i e piece (…) “38
As i can be seen in his ex ac , his exhibi ion was he example o
an inno a i e cu a o ial model ha uni ed epheme al and isual a wo ks.
Fo i s cons uc ion, Szeemann explains, he enue was di ided in h ee
sec ions, pa one dedica ed o documen a ion, pa wo o objec a wo ks
and h ee o pe o mance shows. La e in he in e iew, Szeemann aces
he e olu ion o his cu a o ial model o he o ma explo ed in Documen a
in he same yea :
“(…) Beuys pa icipa ed wi h his O ice o Di ec
Democ acy, whe e we sa h oughou he un o Documen a
discussing a , social p oblems and daily li e wi h isi o s o he
show. (…) This was he i s ime ha Documen a was no longe
concei ed as a “100 Day Museum” bu as a “100 Day E en ”. A e
he summe o 68, heo izing in he a wo ld was o de o he day,
and i shocked people when I pu a s op o all he Hegelian and
Ma xis discussions.” 39
Ob is ’s in e iew wi h Szeeman a emp s o ecall he e olu ion o
his modali y ha con ibu ed o he c ea ion o he s uc u e o wha la e
came o be he ea lie wen y i s cen u y aes he ic ins i u ion. In e es ed in
he e olu ion o exhibi ion models and he his o ical e olu ion o he
in eg a ion o he epheme al wo ks in exhibi ion spaces, his in e iews a e
conduc ed as a way o g adually mapping he e olu ion o exhibi ion
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
38 Ha ald Szeeman, In e iew wi h Hans-Ul ich Ob is , B ie His o y o Cu a ing, JRP
Ringie , 2008, 46-47
39 Ha ald Szeeman, In e iew wi h Hans Ul ich Ob is , B ie His o y o Cu a ing, JRP
Ringie , 2008, 48

!
38!
making and cu a o ial ield as an a is ic p ac ice.40 In his in e iews, Ob is
does no c ea e a linea his o y o cu a o ial e en s, bu a he an open
na a i e ha ela es his o ical ac s and expe imen al p og ams de eloped
in he ea ly cu a ing o he wen ie h cen u y. Ano he example o his
in e iews as a ool o collec es imonies om cu a o ial e en s is he
in e iew wi h he cu a o Wal e Hopps, in which Hopps e ells he s o y
o wha was in ol ed in he cons uc ion o ‘Thi y-Six Hou s’, an
exhibi ion om 1978 a MOTA (Museum o Tempo a y A ) in Pen S a e in
which all kinds o people (a is s and non-a is s) we e in i ed o b ing a
piece hey would like o expose. The pieces we e shown du ing 36 hou s
and we e la e a chi ed by he museum.
“HUO: I one looks a he encyclopedic ange o exhibi ions you’ e
o ganized, i ’s s iking ha , besides he exhibi ions ha ake place in
and ede ine museum spaces, you’ e also done shows in o he
spaces and con ex s whe e you end o change he ules o wha an
exhibi ion ac ually is. I’m in e es ed in hese dialec ics – he
exhibi ions ha ake place ou side he museum c ea e a ic ion wi h
wha akes place inside he museum, and ice e sa. By ques ioning
hese expec a ions he museum becomes a mo e ac i e space. When
you we e a museum cu a o in Washing on you o ganized he show
called Thi y-Six Hou s a an al e na i e space.
WP: Yes, Thi y-Six Hou s was li e ally o ganized om he s ee .
The e was p ac ically no budge , no money.
HUO: So you ac ually only had a small al e na i e space, he
Museum o Tempo a y A , a you disposal.
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
40 The publica ion “A B ie His o y o Cu a ing”(2008), Ob is edi ed a se ies o in e iews
like his one in which we can ac ually see how he cu a ing de eloped as a p ac ice o e
he yea s.
!
39!
WP: Righ . I had a basemen and ou loo s. I no mally jus
showed on wo o hose loo s. I no mally jus showed on wo o
hose loo s. Mo e people will come han i wo loo s. They said:
How do you know? And I said: I you say you’ e ha ing a show
whe e anyone who b ings any hing can be shown, people a e going
o come.
HUO: So you ac ually did he hanging when people b ough hings.
(…)
WP: My only equi emen was ha i had o i h ough he doo .” 41
‘Thi y-Six Hou s’ was an expe imen in which he space o he
museum was challenged and ans o med in o a space ha could e lec on
he ela ionship o he inhabi an s o Pen S a e wi h he local museum. The
expe imen also aised he issue o he impo ance o collec ing social
memo ies o e e yday li e in an ins i u ional a chi e. Implici in Ob is ’s
in e iew p ac ice is he cons an will o challenge he a chi e by
ques ioning he il e ha de e mines wha should be sa ed and, once sa ed,
in which display hey should be shown. As an example o his own p ac ice,
in se e al in e iews, Ob is e e s o he exhibi ion “The D esden Room”
(1927). Mos commonly known as “The Abs ac Cabine ” 42 , his
exhibi ion, cu a ed by Alexand e Do ne , was an example o a p o oca i e
model o exhibi ion making in which Do ne in i ed he so ie a is El
Liss zly o p ojec a pa ilion and cu a e se e al abs ac pain ings inside i .
The esul was a h ee dimensional piece in which he wo ks we e disposed
in a non-ch onological way and also non- hema ic, hus a oiding
ca ego iza ions.
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
41 Wal e Hopps, In e iew wi h Hans-Ul ich Ob is Wal e Hopps, B ie His o y o
Cu a ing,JRP Ringie , 2008, 22-23
42 “The Abs ac Cabine ” was he name o he on ispiece o he exhibi ion.
!
40!
“I you hink ha Do ne in i ed El Lissi zky o make he
Lissi zky’s oom, he “Kabine de Abs ak en” in 1927, i would be
qui e a da ing o hing o do a museum now: o in i e a
con empo a y a is no o do a show, bu o ac ually hand he
collec ion in a oom whe e he a wo ks o o he a is s could be
“mo ed a ound” and cu a ed by isi o s.”43
The i le “The Abs ac Cabine ” eassembles he concep
‘Wunde ka mme ’, mos commonly known as ‘Cabine o Cu iosi ies’
which was he name gi en o a chi al ooms whe e he e ogeneous objec s
om all di e en ma e ials we e combined and collec ed oge he . This
h ee-dimensional p ojec oom was an in i a ion o he iewe o ind‚
’new’ possible connec ions be ween he a wo ks ha we e exhibi ed. The
exhibi ion was an expe imen abou e isi ing he a chi e in which he
bodies o wo k o he a is s we e ein e p e ed by Lissis zky and placed in
he space in o de o ini ia e unexpec ed dialogues. Simila ly, Ob i ’s
in e iews in i e a is s o e isi hei own a chi e, alluding o a kind o
opening o he a is s udio in which many compa isons wi h o he a is s’
a wo ks become possible.!!
!
As p e iously s a ed, he In e iew P ojec has been aken o
di e en s ages and has been explo ed in di e en displays. Wi h he same
in e es in cap u ing wha is le aside in a his o y, Ob is s a ed o s age
his in e iews in an e en called 24 hou s Ma a hon In e iews, (Fig.7)
whe e he epea edly in e iews c ea i e p ac i ione s o wen y- ou hou s
s aigh . The e en s a e dedica ed o a speci ic heme and p ac i ione s om
all a eas a e in i ed o pa icipa e in he same con e sa ion. This p ac ice
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
43 Hans-Ul ich Ob is .
!
41!
occu s in he ame o he museum o galle y, which gi es i an in imacy
simila o a pe o mance. As he i le sugges s, hese pe o mances can las
up o 24, o e en 48, hou s. This ha ks back o he p ac ice o ‘endu ance
a ’44, which e e s o pe o mances ha a e planned o las a long pe iod o
ime and commonly in ol ing some o m o ha dship, such as pain, soli ude
o exhaus ion. In his pe o mance display, Hans-Ul ich Ob is , in a simila
manne o Ma ina Ab amo ic in The A is is P esen , challenges his own
physical endu ance, aking his p esence o exhaus ion. In his pe o mance,
he challenge o Ob is 's physical endu ance in ensi ies he p esence almos
o i s comple e exhaus ion. This exhaus ion o p esence is equi alen o he
exhaus ion o documen a ion. As e e y momen o hese e en s is
documen ed in a ious o ms, i can subsequen ly c ea e a ex machine ha
is designed and hough o deli e o he eade an equi alen o he o iginal
iewe 's expe ience. In pa allel wi h he In e iews p ac ice, a ex machine
o he in e iews is being p oduced. This way, he exhaus i e p esence in
Ob is ’s pe o mance is no o celeb a e any kind o au hen ici y o he
p esen momen (like Ab amo ic does), bu is ins ead o assu e his
documen a ion o ‘e e y hing said in he e en ’ as a as possible.
This con e sa ional-based wo k can be seen as bo h an ex ension
o he wo k and i s a chi e. As Peggy Phelan a gues abou Sophie Calle’s
wo k Ghos s45, a pe o ma i e e en can ne e be ep oduced, bu i can be
ex ended o ano he o m, by being inco po a ed in o ano he body o wo k.
The same can be said abou he In e iew P ojec ha is i s pe o med and
only la e ans o med in o a ex . As Paul Auslande a gues in
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
44 Endu ance A is a concep design by a his o ian Michael Fallon ha e e s o
pe o mances ha a e planned o las a long pe iod o ime commonly in ol ing some o m
o ha dship, such as pain, soli ude o exhaus ion.
45 Calle in e iewed a ious isi o s and membe s o he museum s a , asking hem o
desc ibe he s olen pain ings (pain ings ha disappea ed om Isabella S ewa Ga dne
Museum in Bos on in 1990). She hen ansc ibed hese ex s and placed hem nex o he
pho og aphs o he galle ies.
!
48!
be ween sen ences, pause om one in e locu o , o ano he , and
pause o a en ion he hea ing ha doubles he o ce o locu ion.” 51
Ce ainly, in In e iew P ojec , Ob is is awa e o how a
con e sa ion can up u e he low o discou se. Simila ly o wha Blancho
sugges s, Ob is aims o c ea e a con e sa ion ha e e s o an o al his o y
o collec ed con e sa ions, in which in e up ion, edundancy and e en
epe i ion a e welcome as pa o he necessa ily imp o ised s a us o a
con e sa ion. Besides la e exis ing in a ex o m, In e iew P ojec has as
i s base he aes he ics o a con e sa ion. Fo he p in ed e sion o he
in e iew, he layou designe Ma hias Augus yniak, oge he wi h Hans
Ul ich Ob is , ies o cap u e he essence o he con e sa ion and ies ‘ o
con ey in he layou o he book edi ion he same ‘ha mony’ o he
con e sa ion.’ 52
A s ake, in bo h li e and p in ed e sions, is he p oduc i e no ion
o how hough can mo e h ough a con e sa ion. In his in e iew wi h he
Ge man philosophe Hans-Geo g Gadame , his no ion is explo ed when
Gadame goes a beyond in ime and connec s he legacy o ou speech
con e sa ional modali y wi h Pla o’s dialogues:
“HUO: In Gedich und Gesp äch (Poem and Con e sa ion, 1990),
you explain p ecisely ha language only li es in he con e sa ion.
HGG: O cou se, because in con e sa ion one is indeed always in
mo ion. By gi ing an answe , he o he comple es one's one
speaking.
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
51 Mau ice Blancho , The In ini e Con e sa ion, T ansla ed by Susan Hanson. Uni e si y o
Minneso a,1993.
52 Hans-Ul ich Ob is .

!
49!
HUO: Again and again you e e o he impo ance o con e sa ion
o philosophy in you wo k, and how a ely con e sa ion appea s in
philosophy a e Pla o. How would you explain he absence o
con e sa ion in he his o y o philosophy?
HGG: People s ill don' belie e ha Pla o did no ha e he answe s
o he ques ions asked. Bu ac ually, his is essen ial o he ques ion.
We awe chea ing i we ask ques ions we know he answe s o. The
na u al way is ha one wan s o unde s and he o he and his answe
oo.”53
As he in e iew mo es o wa d, bo h p o agonis s ela e hei
p ac ice de eloping o me a-linguis ic discou se, since bo h in e iew and
in e iewee a e e lec ing on con e sa ions:
“HUO: In in e iews, you o en men ion he down igh ca alyzing
e ec which you con e sa ions wi h Heidegge had on you. Could
you say some hing abou you i s mee ings? You desc ibe he i s
con e sa ion in pa icula as a c ucial e en .
HGG: I mus admi ha I canno eally emembe his exac ly
anymo e. I hink ha one should ealize abo e all ha Heidegge has
ecognized he impo ance o silence. This cons i u es a signi ican
pa o his e ec . Silence is a way o alking. I in i es comple ion.
HUO: This eminds me o John Cage and his iconoclas ic ges u e o
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
53 Hans-Geo g Gadame , In e iew wi h Hans-Ul ich Ob is , In e iew P ojec , Volume I,
443, 444
!
50!
emaining silen .
HGG: This is a game wi h he dying down o sound. I couldn'
imagine a s onge eeling o se eni y hen when a piece o music
comes o an end and ades away.
HUO: Should we s op now? (…) “ 54
This ex ac p o es Ob is ’s awa eness o he dynamic ela ionship
be ween he in e iew and he in e iewee, and his in e es in he possibili y
o managing he unexpec ed pa hs o he con e sa ion. I is also a e lec ion
on how asking a ques ion is al eady o mula ing an answe .55
As E ik Ve gahen sugges s, he in e iew can call on a ious
me hods and con igu a ions, bu mainly de elops in wo di e en
di ec ions, ei he “cen i ugal” when he cen al heme o discussion mo es
ou wa ds, o “cen ipe al” when i mo es owa ds a cen al heme. As
Ve gahen w i es:
“In he i s ins ance, he in e iewe adop s a low p o ile,
holding back so as be a uned o his in e locu o , “accompanying”
him o he in he musical sense o he e m. Whe eas in he second
ins ance, he in e iewe ies on he con a y o d aw he
in e iewee owa ds him, he bes in e iews ob iously being hose
which con ey a balance be ween hese wo dynamics.”56
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
54 Hans-Geo g Gadame , In e iew wi h Hans-Ul ich Ob is , In e iew P ojec , Volume I,
444, 445.
55 In o de wo ds, he Po uguese philosophe João dos San os would ask in his amous
adio show in 1995: “I you don’ know, why do you ask?”
56 E ik Ve hagen, “On In e iews”, ansla ion Simon Pleasance, C i ique d’A ,
32, Au omne 2008, Acessed in 12 June 2016: h p://c i iqueda . e ues.o g/775
!
51!
As i can be no ed, Ob is is in e es ed in le ing he con e sa ion
un old wi hou implica ing p ede e mined o planned s uc u es and
na a i es. In his pe o ma i e con e sa ions, neu ali y unc ions as a
cen al elemen o he ac ion. Howe e , in he con ex o he a is ic
in e iew, neu ali y is di e en om passi i y, which ends owa ds
p ede e mined s abili y and a dialogue wi hou equal p o agonis s.
Neu ali y, as an elemen o ac ion, e e s o he in e als and pauses in he
con e sa ion, he less de ined and open space be ween he wo ds and he
momen be o e he con e sa ion whe e i is implici ly se as a quasi- ule
allowing he pe o ma i e luidi y o he con e sa ion i sel wi hou
excluding (and a imes e en encou aging) he possibili y o in e up ions,
hesi a ions, epe i ions and o he con ingencies. In ha way, neu ali y
ende s he con e sa ion less consciously guided, bu mo e concep ually
s uc u ed. This way, Ob is opens up he possibili y o combine wo
complemen a y dynamics. As Louis Ma in w i es, he in e iew is a
“discou se pe o ce a isk o d i o in dange o imp o isa ion, because
pa i no all o i ha is u e ed will be so in he o m o eplies p o oked
by a ques ion, o which nei he o he wo pa ies in ol ed is uly
mas e ”.57
As he in e iew mo es o wa d, Ob is inc easingly wi hd aws
om his ole as an ac i e in e iewe , lea ing space o he unp edic able
pa hs o he con e sa ion. As shown, he con e sa ion is simul aneously
conduc ed by bo h in e iewe and in e iewee. This way, In e iew P ojec
builds an ongoing con e sa ion in which common meaning is p oduced
mos ly because he con e sa ion ha is being ‘pe o med’ agmen s i sel
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
57 Louis Ma in, De l’En e ien, Pa is, Minui , 1997,11-12
!
52!
by changing p o agonis s. Ob is designs his in e iews as unp edic able
con e sa ions.
Ano he no ion is a s ake in ‘in ini e con e sa ions’. As I a gued in
he las chap e , Ob is conduc s his in e iews as a way o allowing a
ein e p e a ion o a e en s om he pas in he p esen momen o his
in e iews, when he in e iews p ac i ione s who pa icipa ed in hose
e en s. A he same ime, hese in e iews ha e e o he pas a e
con inued in ime. Fo example, he in e iews he same p ac i ione se e al
imes o e he yea s, accompanying his wo k and linking he i s in e iew
o he second, hi d e c., aking he las in e iew as a poin o depa u e o
he new one. This dynamic also con ibu es o wha we can call an in ini e
con e sa ion. Ob is , while being in he p esen , dialogues wi h he pas , bu
a he same ime pushes he dialogue in o he u u e. As an example, a he
end o his in e iews, Ob is always asks his in e iewees “wha is you
un ealized p ojec ?” Toge he wi h Julia Pey on-Jones in he Se pen ine
Galle y, Ob is has c ea ed wha he calls he ‘Agency o Un ealized
P ojec s’, an a chi e in which all he answe s o his inal ques ion a e
sa ed, wai ing o be ealized.
VI Looking Fo wa d: The A chi e o he Fu u e
As I ha e shown, he no ion o he pas as a empo ali y a anged in
he p esen in Hans-Ul ich Ob is ’s in e iews can be seen as he bulk o his
p ojec . Bu he comp ehensi e documen a ion o his e en s also e eals an
anxie y o ime ha somehow wishes o accele a e he p esen in o de o
achie e p o isional aces o he u u e. In Ma a hon In e iews, Ob is ’s
exhaus ion o p esence is equi alen o he exhaus ion o documen a ion, as
i he uses he p esen as a ehicle o push in o ma ion and his o ical ac s
o wa d, collec ed in his con e sa ions. The in e iews a e documen ed
h ough a ious suppo s; Ob is p ojec s he pe o ma i i y o he p esen
!
53!
momen in he u u e pe o ma i i y o he documen by eco ding he
e en , assu ing he pe o ma i i y o i s aces and p o es ing in ad ance
agains o ge ulness.
In his way, Ob is ’s in e iew o ma goes beyond he idea o
egis e ing pas e en s ha ha e been o go en. I is a ool o esea ch
abou he u u e.
“Se e al ghos e sions on he nex housand pages ha e
exis ed o e he cou se o his book’s ge mina ion – each o each
we e no ional p omises and p emises o he u u e In e iews,
Volume 3, Volume 4, and so on. They also p omise o u u e
p oduc ions o eali y in he books, buildings, exhibi ions and
ma a hons ha In e iew P ojec igge .” 58
Ob is claims his con e sa ions o be p epa a o y ‘ske ches’ o his
cu a o ial wo ks. In his way, ins ead o a wo k ha dissol es in o
disappea ance, as Peggy Phelan sugges s, he documen a ion o In e iews
P ojec has he abili y o pe pe ua e he p esence o he p esen momen in o
a u u e display. Ob is igh s agains wha has been unde s ood as
p esence, by unde lining in his p ojec he impossibili y o p esence as a
unique si e o he body. Fo him, he a chi e o In e iew P ojec is a space
in which his in e iews may in luence he u u e.
Chap e Th ee
!
I Pe o mance A e li es
The exp ession “pe o mance a e li e” appea ed o he i s ime in
he con ex o a cycle o con e ences o ganized a he es i al “C ossing he
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
58 Ka en Ma a in p e ace o In e iew P ojec , Volume II, 11

!
54!
Line” a he Museum o Mode n A 59 in New Yo k in all 2015. The cycle
o con e ences, en i led ‘A e li es: The Pe sis ence o Pe o mance’ and
cu a ed by he schola s And é Lepecki and Ad ian Hea h ield, was
dedica ed o he p oblem o a chi ing and p ese ing pe o mance a . As a
poin o depa u e, he con e ence claimed o e hink he pe sis ence o
pe o mance in ime by p oposing a poli ically and aes he ically al e na i e
ame o pe o mance a in o de o challenge he p econcep ions
conce ning pe o mance a 's ma e iali y.
“Pe o mance is inc easingly documen ed, a chi ed,
ins i u ionally inco po a ed, and globally dissemina ed. While i s
epheme al na u e is o en celeb a ed, i s inhe en ansience binds i
o i s many e u ns—i s media ions and a e li es. Today, c i icism
is ocused mo e on he ecu ence and pe sis ence o pe o mance
han on i s disappea ance.“60
The e m ‘a e li e’ in i es us o hink abou he ma e iali y o
pe o mance a a e he e en has aken place, o ‘a e i s ac -ness.’61 The
e m sugges s ha he ma e ial cons i u i e o pe o mance s ays ‘ali e’
a e i s momen o p oduc ion. The e o e, i sugges s ha a e i s
p oduc ion, he ma e ial can subsequen ly be si ua ed in a ‘second suppo ’
whe e he aces o he pe o mance a e sa ed o insc ibed. As I ha e
shown, i is no commonly ag eed ha pe o mance emains in i s
documen a ion. This idea o a ‘second suppo ’ he e o e complica es wha
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
59 “C ossing he Line” Fes i al websi e: Accessed in 16 June 2016,
h p://www. ia .o g/c ossing heline/2015/hea h ield-lepecki.sh ml
60 Cu a o ial ex o And é Lepecki and Ad ian Hea h ield in “C ossing he Line”, in
Moma, 2015.
61 Schneide ’s exp ession in “Pe o mance Remains”, Pe o mance Resea ch, Jou nal o
Pe o ming A s, 2014, 105
!
55!
has been de ined as pe o mance on ology since he 1970s. As a gued
be o e, pe o mance was usually seen as a p ac ice ha only exis ed in he
‘p esen momen ’, being con inually celeb a ed as he a o m o he “he e
and now.” In 1993, Peggy Phelan, s a ed ha ‘pe o mance canno be
sa ed, eco ded o documen ed’. As she a gued, o he deg ee ha
pe o mance a emp s o ende in he economy o ep oduc ion, i be ays i s
own on ology.62
Howe e , as a gued in Chap e One, wha is conside ed as p esence
in he aes he ics o pe o mance a elies on a pa adox.63 The co e o his
pa adox is he ac ha wha claims o be 'p esence' in pe o mance a
doesn' necessa ily happen in he ac ual p esen . I will show how his
pa adox o p esence, which is o en seen as he p incipal aes he ic ea u e o
pe o mance a , is aligned wi h he pa adox o 'being ali e'. As
epheme ali y is celeb a ed as an aes he ic condi ion, he esul o
pe o ma i e p ac ice is he idea o i s disappea ance in o absence. The
much celeb a ed ‘p esen momen ’ e e s o a unique and au hen ic ins an
ha only exis s along wi h he ac ual pe o mance, so ha immedia ely a e
i s ac -ness ( o epea Schneide 's no ion) he p esen anishes in o absence
and he objec ‘s ops exis ing’. This idea, emphasized o e and o e in
pe o mance heo y, 64 simul aneously a icula es he image o a
decons uc ion and dep oduc ion o he sel -ex inguishing objec o
pe o mance.
I is his idea o pe o mance as me ely exis ing in he ac ual p esen
which excludes he possibili y o ‘li e’ ha ex ends i sel in o non-anima ed
ma e ials such as hose ha cons i u e he common aces o pe o mance:
ex s, eco ds, audio- isual suppo s and pho og aphs. This a chi al
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
62 Phelan, Unma ked: The Poli ics o Pe o mance, 143.
63 See chap e one.
64 I am e e ing o schola s such as Peggy Phelan and He be Blau, who de end ha
pe o mance only belongs o he p esen .
!
56!
di ision ha sepa a es he p esen om he pas ep oduces he same bina y
s uc u e ha can be ound in he sepa a ion be ween li e and non-li e, a
sepa a ion ha has egula ed a lo o pe o mance a 's aes he ic and
philosophical commi men s. Wha i we asked, his o ically, when and how
hese bina y opposi ions o p esen s. pas and li e s. non-li e came o be
ied up in de ining he ‘li e’ o he objec o pe o mance? The concep o
he ‘dea h o he objec ’, ul ima ely emphasized wi h he ise o
pos mode nism, has become no o ious in and h ough a ious o ms o a .
Bu somehow, in pe o mance a , he idea o he ‘dea h o he objec ’ is
mo e ob ious and he e o e mo e openly celeb a ed. Acco ding o Rebecca
Schneide , he idea o pe o mance as ‘disappea ing’ has been emphasized
by he way in which i s p oduc s ha e been a chi ed. Since he a chi ing
o pe o mance a claims o ‘sa e’ he emains o i s “disappea ance”
(wha is supposed o be pe o mance's o igina y on ological condi ion), he
idea o he ‘dea h o he objec ’ is a icula ed by he a chi e i sel , as
Schneide in ima es in he ollowing passage:
"I ha e discussed he pa icidal impulse as p oduc i e o
dea h in o de o insu e emains. I ha e sugges ed ha he
inc easing echnologies o a chi ing may be why he la e 20 h
cen u y has been bo h so enamo ed o pe o mance and so eple e
wi h dea hs: dea h o au ho , dea h o science, dea h o his o y, dea h
o li e a u e, dea h o cha ac e , dea h o he a an -ga de, dea h o
mode nism.“ 65
His o ically, mos app oaches o he objec o pe o mance es ablish
a ela ionship be ween he imma e ial (non-g aspable) epheme al objec and
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
65 Rebecca Schneide , “Pe o mance Remains”, Pe o mance Resea ch, Jou nal o
Pe o ming A s, 2014, 105
!
57!
he ‘dea h o he objec ’. In o he wo ds, i has been emphasized ha when
he objec loses i sel in disappea ance, i “s ops exis ing” and ‘dies’ in i s
absence. Bu wha exac ly does he ‘dea h o he objec ’ o pe o mance
mean his o ically? In he con ex o pe o mance a his o y, i is ela ed o
he assump ion ha an objec is cons i u ed solely by ma e ial elemen s
(which denies any kind o ma e ial ha is no gi en suppo in a ma e ial
objec ) and wi h he necessi y o he a chi e o collec and egis e a s able,
no mu able objec . Conside ing disappea ance as pe o mance’s
on ological condi ion was he e o e a necessa y ing edien o ix and ensu e
he o iginali y and au hen ici y o i s o iginal p oduc . In his iew, he
dea h o he objec o pe o mance is a condi ion o he celeb a ion o i s
epheme ali y.
Howe e , i we ollow Lepecki's and Heal h ield's sugges ion ha
pe o mance ex ends i s ma e iali y in o i s a e li e, we should i s y o
look a he aces o pe o mance no as ‘no ali e’, bu as anima ed ma e ial
capable o communica ing and con aining pe o ma i i y.66 This al e na i e
iew pa es he way o he unde s anding ha he objec domain o
pe o mance a , in i s a e li e (a e i s exis ence), may s ill consis o
objec s.67 Bu i we conside “disappea ance” as a undamen al ea u e o
pe o mance, wha kind o objec would esul om ha conside a ion?
He e, I will ollow Mieke Bal's s a egy, who ied o ( e)de ine he objec
domain o isual cul u e in o de o unde s and he causes o isual
essen ialism. I will i s look a he objec domain o pe o mance a . In
o de o es ablish he objec domain o isual cul u e, Bal s a ed by calling
ou a en ion o he ambigui y o he wo d 'objec ' i sel . She w i es:
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
66 Paul Auslande a gumen in “The Pe o ma i i y o Pe o mance Documen a ion”, see
Chap e one.
67 This no ion appea s in opposi ion o he idea ha pe o mance a a e i s p oduc ion
disappea s.
!
64!
ac i ely shapes and con ibu es o i s own his o y. Jus like Sehgal, bu wi h
qui e di e en aes he ic means, Ob is 's In e iew P ojec p omo es a ‘new’
way o inco po a ing collec i e memo y in o he a chi al body, which
acco ding o Jacques Le Go can lead o ‘a new kind o his o y ha should
necessa ily cons i u e a new kind o a chi e.’ 80
The idea ha a pe o ma i e e en only consis s in i s ‘li e ac ’ and
ha i is he e o e solely cons i u ed by ha ‘p esen momen ’ leads o a
pe spec i e ha p i ileges he ‘being he e’ (and being inside he
ins i u ional ame) o o he ypes o encoun e s. My examples show ha
he idea o he ‘dea h o he objec ’ in pe o mance a is basically g ounded
in a biological me apho whe e he e en is unde s ood o be ‘li e’ and
whe e i s aces a e pa o i s disappea ance and i s ul ima e ‘dea h’. One o
he cen al pa adoxes in p ese ing pe o mance a is no excluding he
possibili y o ‘ lesh’ om he a chi e ( he imma e ial side o he objec ha
cons an ly ‘slips away’, bu ne e heless exis s), bu only coun ing he
‘skele on’ and physical ma e ial o he pe o mance e en as pa o he
a chi e. As Rebecca Schneide a gues in espec o he pa adox o
p ese ing pe o mance a :
“I he li ing co pse is a emain o his o y, i is ce ainly
e isi ed ac oss a body ha canno pass as he co pse i e-calls. I i
canno pass, wha kind o claim o au hen ici y can such a aul y
co pse demand?” 81
The exp ession “Pe o mance A e li e” claims ha he a chi e is
ali e and ha each ime a pe o mance ace is e isi ed, i is inco po a ed
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
80 Le Go , His o y and Memo y, 95.
81!Schneide , Pe o mance Remains, 108!

!
65!
in o he obse e ’s expe ience and consequen ly ‘b ough o li e.’ When I
an icipa ed (in Chap e s Two and Th ee) ha he aes he ics o bo h wo ks
expand he ac ual p ojec s in o hei a chi es, I was al eady unde lining his
c ucial dimension o he a e li es o hese p ojec s.
II Conclusion
This disse a ion conce ns he s udy o wo di e en , bu
complemen a y aes he ic s a egies ha challenge dominan a chi al
s uc u es. I chose wo se ies o a wo ks, Cons uc ed Si ua ions and
In e iew P ojec as examples o wo ks ha challenge he way in which
pe o mance a has been p ese ed and his o icized. I ied o show how
hey p o ision he ac o documen a ion o hei wo ks and which
ans o ma ions ha would b ing o he adi ional p ocesses o a chi ing.
Mo e speci ically, I ied o show how bo h wo ks aes he ics con ibu e o
inno a i e ways o a chi ing.
As a gued, pe o mance a is an a o m, which on ological
ea u es p essu e he museum s uc u e as well as he ways in which we
w i e his o y. Besides his al eady exis ing ea u e, as I a gued, Cons uc ed
Si ua ions and In e iew P ojec ha e, on he basis o hei aes he ics a
igge ing ea u e ha challenges, ac i ely, he a chi e and he way in
which pas wo ks ha e been his o icized. To unde s and his ea u e o hei
aes he ics, I ied o explo e, in he i s place, he objec domain o hei
pe o mances, compa ing i s la ge de ini ion o he adi ional way i has
been seen. As showed in he analysis o he wo ks, bo h p opose a complex
objec ha can be seen in mo e han one empo ali y.
We could designa e his opening o he empo al ho izon o
pe o mance a as ‘dis ibu ed empo ali y’, ollowing Al ed Gell’s no ion
!
66!
o he dis ibu ed objec .82 As he a his o ian a gues, in he con ex o
Occiden al aes he ics we a e amilia wi h one o m o dis ibu ed objec ,
he oeu e o comple ed wo ks o a single a is . This way, Cons uc ed
Si ua ions and In e iew P ojec pe o mances, aken oge he , o m a
empo ally dis ibu ed objec , which e ol es o e ime along wi h he
pa icipan s' in e en ions, a ec s and collec i e memo y o he e en s.
Also, his dis ibu ed objec becomes a common e e ence be ween he
pa icipan s. Mo eo e , his dis ibu ed objec which is, as a whole,
ung aspable, becomes a ne wo k be ween he subjec s whe e he memo y o
he e en is insc ibed.83
As Michel Foucaul in e es ingly sugges s in A chaeology o
Knowledge, he a chi e is a sys em o simul aneously ans o ming pas ,
p esen , and u u e – ha is, a sys em o ec ea ing a whole economy o he
empo al. This same de ini ion p oposed by Foucaul o desc ibe he a chi e
can be ansla ed in o he p ac ice o Sehgal and Ob is . Thei ‘dis ibu ed
objec s’ also ec ea e a new economy o he empo al by jux aposing
di e en empo ali ies ha a e con inually linked by he same objec . This
means ha hei objec s, o e ime, mo e close and close o he a chi e.
As also a gued, Cons uc ed Si ua ions and In e iew P ojec ex end
hei wo ks in o he a chi e by p o isioning he way in which he a chi al
s uc u e, ha ecei es hei wo k, will be ans o med. This ex ension o
hei wo ks was analyzed in he ligh o Lepecki and Hea h ield p oposal
ha pe o mance may esis s i s ac ual momen and con inue in i s a e li e.
As I ied o show, in he las chap e , bo h wo ks con ibu e o a no ion o
pe o mance as an objec ha is no ‘ ozen’ in he p esen momen and,
he e o e, no ixed in a single space.
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
82 Al ed Gell, A and Agency, An An h opological Theo y, Cla endon: Ox o d, 1998,142
83 Gell quo ed in And ew Jones, Memo y and Ma e ial Cul u e, Uni e si y o
Sou hamp on, 2007, 21-22
!
67!
This way, bo h unde line he po en iali y o pe o mance o
challenge he museum s uc u e. Bu hey go a s ep u he : wha hey
p opose, is somehow “some hing o he han pe o mance”, since hey
cons uc a way o challenge he a chi e and change i om wi hin h ough
he elabo a ion o an objec capable o ope a e and ans o m a chi al
s uc u es.
The ges u e o p oducing an objec ha sugges s ano he kind o
o de ing wi hin he a chi al s uc u e, and consequen ly in he museum,
ecalls Jacques Ranciè e’s de ini ion o he poli ics o a (in opposi ion o
poli ical a ). Fo Ranciè e, a is s who pa icipa e ac i ely in changing
o de s o he ‘ isible, sayable and hinkable’ p oduce a ‘ edis ibu ion o he
senses’, c ea ed h ough he egime o aes he ics.84 Ranciè e a gues ha he
egimes o aes he ics, as well as he poli ical ac ion, can e-con igu e and
edis ibu e he sensible in o de o c ea e new modes o exis ence. In he
essay A , Wo k and Poli ics in Disciplina y Socie ies and Socie ies o
Secu i y (2008), Mau icio Lazza a o, in eac ion o Ranciè e's hesis,
p oposes a new aes he ic pa adigm. Acco ding o him, he cons uc ion o
new modes o exis ence media ed solely by he aes he ics egime is no
longe enough o means o poli ical exp ession oday. As he a gues: “I is
only possible o a icula e he meaning o a si ua ion in ela ion o an ac ion
unde aken o ans o m i .”85 He e, he a gumen o Lazza a o could be
ela ed o he ges u e o Cons uc ed Si ua ions and In e iew P ojec o
ex ending hei objec in o he a chi e. Bo h wo ks do no solely p opose a
new way o a chi ing, hey in i e he ins i u ions o (mo e o less) adical
changes in o de o ecei e hei wo k. Since bo h wo ks, as a gued, a e
subjec ed o pe manen ans o ma ions as an implici consequence o hei
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
84 Jacques Ranciè e, Le Pa age du Sensible, La Fab ique Édi ions, Pa is, 1998, 16
85 Mau icio Lazza a o, “A , Wo k and Poli ics in Disciplina y Socie ies and Socie ies o
Secu i y,” Radical Philosophy 149, May-June 2008, 26
!
68!
s uc u e, once hey en e he ealm o he ins i u ions, hey keep pu ing
p essu e on he ins i u ions o e-e alu a e hei modali ies o a chi ing.
E en whe e hey claim o mean he opposi e, aes he ic ins i u ions in
hei accus omed s uc u es end o make us belie e ha wha cons i u es
he a chi e is e e nal, i m, solid and ne e epheme al. Wha Sehgal and
Ob is p opose a e a chi es whose unc ion canno be ully pe o med by a
gi en ins i u ion. Thei a chi es a e cons i u ed and ope a ed by he
memo ies o human beings. Th ough he ansi o y and ci cums an ial
na u e o making a hey a i m he ansi o y and ci cums an ial na u e o
building he a chi e.
!
69!
Bibliog aphy
!!!!!
Auslande , Philip and Bi inge , Johannes. “The In elligen S age.” A
Jou nal o he Pe o ming A s, Augus 2014.
Auslande , Philip. “Cybe space as a Pe o mance A Venue.” Pe o mance
Resea ch, 2001: 123-127.
Auslande , Philip. “Agains On ology: Making Disc in ions Be ween he
Li e and he Media ized.” Pe o mance Resea ch, 1997: 50-55.
Auslande , Philip. Cul u e, Li eness: Pe o mance in a Media ized.
Abing on: New Yo k: Rou ledge, 2008.
Auslande , Philip. “The Pe o ma i i y o Pe o mance Documen a ion.”
Schola ly Jou nals Online, 2006: 1-10.
Aus in, J.L. How o do Things wi h Wo ds. Ox o d: Cla edon P ess, 1962.
Bal, Mieke. “Visual Essen ialism o he Objec o Visual Cul u e.” Jou nal
o Visual Cul u e, Ap il 2003.
Bauman, Richa d. “Ve bal A as Pe o mance.” Ame ican An h opologis
77 (1975): 290-311.
Benjamin D. Powell, T acy S ephenson Sha e . “On he Haun ing o
Pe o mance S udies.” Liminali ies: A Jou nal o Pe o mance S udies,
Ap il 2009.
Benso, Sil ia. The Face o Things: A Di e en Si e o E hics. Albany: S a e
Uni e si y o New Yo k P ess, 2000.
Bishop, Clai e. A i icial Hells: Pa icipa o y A and he Poli ics o
Spec a o ship. London, New Yo k: Ve so, 2012.
Bishop, Clai e. “No Pic u es Please. The A o Tino Sehgal” A o um,
2005.
Blancho , Mau ice. The In ini e Con e sa ion. T ansla ed by Susan Hanson.
Uni e si y o Minneso a, 1993.

!
70!
Blaze , Da id. Cu a ionism: How Cu a ing Took O e he A Wo ld and
E e y hing Else. On a io: Coach House Books, 2014.
Collins, Lau en. “The Ques ion A is .” New Yo k Times, 6 Augus 2012.
Accessed June 16, 2016.
h p://www.newyo ke .com/magazine/2012/08/06/ he-ques ion-a is
Cull, Lau a. “A en ion T aning Immanence and on ological pa icipa ion in
Kap ow, Deleuze and Be gson.” Pe o mance Resea ch: A Jou nal o he
Pe o ming A s, Decembe 2011: 80-91.
Da ms, Lisa. “A chi es Fe e : Uses o Documen in Con empo a y A .”
The Ame ican A chi is , 2009: 253-257.
Debo d, Guy. The Socie y o Spec acle. New Yo k: Zone Books, 1994.
De ida, Jacques. “A chi e Fe e : A F eudian Imp ession.” Diac i ics 25
1995: 9-63.
Dohe hy, Clai e. Si ua ion. London: Whi echapel Galle y, 2005.
Fishe -Lich e, E ika. “Cul u e as Pe o mance: Thea e His o y and Cul u al
His o y.” Ac as/P oceedings, 2004. Accessed May 14, 2016.
h p://ww3. l.ul.p /cen os_in s / ea o/pagina/Publicacoes/Ac as/e ika_de .
pd
Fos e , Hal. “An A chi al Impulse.” Oc obe , 2004: 3-22.
Foucaul , Michel. The A chaeology o Knowledge. T ansla ed by A.M
She idan. London: Rou ledge, 2002.
F ied, Michael. “A and Objec hood.” A and Objec hood. Chicago:
Uni e si y o Chicago P ess, 1998.
Gell, Al ed. A and Agency: An An h opological Theo y. Ox o d:
Cla edon, 1998.
Giannachi, Gab iela, e Nick Kaye. Pe o ming P esence: Be ween he Li e
and he Simula ed. Manches e and New Yo k: Manches e P ess, 2011.
Giannichi, Gab iella, e Michael Shanks Nick Kaye. A chaeologies o
P esence: A , Pe o mance and he Resis ance o Being. New Yo k:
Rou ledge, 2012.
!
71!
Go , Jacques Le. His o y and Memo y. Columbia Uni e si y P ess, 1992.
Go man, E in. F ame Analysis: An Essay on he O ganiza ion o
Expe ience. Ha a d Uni e si y P ess, 1975.
G a za, Agnieszka. “Expanding Pe o mance.” PAJ: A Jou nal o
Pe o mance and A 35 (Sep embe 2013): 41-48.
G i in, Tim. Tino Sehgal: An In e iew, A o um, May, 2005.
Hayes, Ch is a-Ma ia Le m. “Tino Sehgal: Cons uc ed Si ua ions, Joyce
and Beyus.” S edelijk Museum Ams e dam, 27 de Augus de 2015.
h p://jou nal.s edelijk.nl/en/ ino-sehgal-cons uc ed-si ua ions-joyce-and-
beuys/
Hea h ield, Ad ian. Li e: A and Pe o mance. Rou ledge, 2004.
Jones, Amelia. "P esence" in Absen ia: Expe iencing Pe o mance as
Documen a ion.” A Jou nal (College A Associa ion) 56 (Win e 1997):
11-18.
Jones, Amelia. The A is is P esen : A is ic Re-enacmen and he
Impossibili y o P esence.” The D ama Re iew (The MIT P ess) 55 (2011):
16-45.
Jones, Amelia. Body A : Pe o ming he Subjec . Minneapolis: Uni e si y
o Minneso a, 1998.
Jones, Amelia. “P esence in Absen ia: Expe iencing Pe o mance as
Documen a ion, A Jou nal, . 56, n.4, 1997.
Jones, Amelia. “Unp edic abili ies Tempo ali ies: The Body as
Pe o mance in (A ) His o y.” Pe o ming A chi es/A chi es o
Pe o mance, 53-72. Museum o Tusculanum , 2013.
K auss, Rosalind. “No es on he Index: Se en ies A in Ame ica.” Oc obe ,
Au umn de 1977: 58-67.
Kuble , Geo ge. The Shape o Time. Yale Uni e si y P ess, 1962.
Lazza a o, Mau icio. “A , Wo k and Poli ics in Disciplina y Socie ies and
Socie ies o Secu i y.” Radical Philosophy, 2008.
!
72!
Lepecki, And é. “No e Va iações Sob e Coisas e Pe o mance.”
U dimen o, n. 19, No embe 2012.
Lepecki, And é. “The Body as A chi e: Will o Re-enac and he A e li es
o Dances.” Dance Resea ch Jou nal 42 (2010): 28-48.
Manning, E in. Rela ionscapes: Mo emen , A , Philosophy. London,
England: The MIT P ess, Camb idge Massachuse s, 2009.
Ma in, Louis. De L'en e ien. Pa is: Minui , 1997.
Max, D.T. “A o Con e sa ion.” The New Yo ke , Decembe 8, 2014.
Accessed Ap il 30, 2016.
h p://www.newyo ke .com/magazine/2014/12/08/a -con e sa ion
Ob is , Hans-Ul ich. B ie His o y o Cu a ing. JRP Ringie , 2014.
Ob is , Hans-Ul ich. E e y hing You Wan ed o Know Abou Cu a ing.
Be lin: S enbe g P ess, 2011.
Ob is , Hans-Ul ich. In e iew, Volume II. Edi ed by Cha les A sène-Hen y
e Ka en Ma a Shumon Basa . New Yo k, 2010.
Ob i s, Hans-Ul ich In e iews Volume I, ed. Bou oux, Thomas, 2003.
Oumi Renes, Lau a McCulloch Ma ina Leino. Pe o ma i i y in he
Galle y: S aging In e ac i e Encoun e s. Pe e Lang, 2014.
Phelan, Peggy. Unma ked: The Poli ics o Pe o mance. London and New
Yo k: Rou ledge., 1993.
Ranciè e, Jacques. Le Pa age du Sensible: Es é ique e Poli ique. Pa is: La
ab ique édi ions, 1998.
Ranciè e, Jacques. The Poli ics o Aes he ics. London: Bloombu y
Academic, 2013.
Read, Alan. Thea e In imacy & Engagemen : The Las Human Venue.
New Yo k: Palg a e Macmillan, 2008.
Rice, Shelley. “Back o he Fu u e: Geo ge Kuble , Law ence Alloway and
he Complex P esen .” A Jou nal, 2009.
!
73!
Richa d, Thomas. “A chi e and U opia.” Uni e si y o Cali o nia P ess.
Rep esen a ions: Impe ial Fan asies and Pos colonial His o ies, 1992: 104-
135.
S.T. Tino Sehgal: The Fine A o Human In e ac ion, The Economis , 12
July 2012. Accessed May 8, 2016.
h p://www.economis .com/blogs/p ospe o/2012/07/ ino-sehgal
Schneide , Rebecca. “Pe o mance Remains.” Pe o mance Resea ch,
2014: 100-108.
Shaughnessy, Nicolas. Applying Pe o mance: Li e A , Socially Engaged
Thea e and A ec i e P ac ice. New Yo k: Palg a e Macmillan, 2012.
Szewczyk, Monika. “A o Con e sa ion.” e- lux jou nal, Feb ua y 2009.
Taylo , Diana. “T ansla ing Pe o mance.” Mode n Language Associa ion,
2002: 44-50.
Yap, Chin-Chin. “Undocumen ed: Tino Sehgal.” A Asia Paci ic, June de
2009.
Online Sou ces
h p://www.moma.o g/
h p://www.s edelijk.nl/
h p://www. a e.o g.uk/